Quote Originally Posted by SeanE
Quote Originally Posted by El Gamo
I think it's too difficult to rank him. I'm not particularly good at making ATG lists aside from maybe a top 5 or 10 but I don't see him being a top 20 if I managed to make one.

Why you may ask? Simply put,talent wise,he was SENSATIONAL at the lower weights but at 147 and 154,he has wins over Oscar(1 debateable),Collazo,a shot to heck Vargas and 2 losses to Vernon and 2 losses to Winky. That is not an ATG record. Also at 147/154,I don't think he displays the same power,technique nor speed he did at the lower weights. He slaps alot more with his punches.

Obviously he still has time to increase his legacy and wins over Cotto and Mayweather would make him an ATG but until then,imo, I don't think he's top 20. I can think of RJJ,Pernell,Mayweather,Ricardo Lopez,Tito and maybe a few others from this generation who have more claim to being ATG's than Shane. Again,just my opinion and it can change if someone puts a valid argument forward.
I think he has a better claim than Tito. Tito was a great welter and good at 154, but he didn't really have it as a middleweight, and even in victory, Tito showed his limitations against Oscar. Tito got dismantled by Winky and Hopkins. Let's not take anything away from Forrest. When healthy and in his prime, he was a tremendous fighter. If you want to knock Shane's record, look at Tito's...Sweetpea was shot when Tito beat him, Camacho was past his best, though I think he would have beaten Camacho at any point. You can say Vargas was shot when he fought Shane, but they guy is 6 years and 20 fights younger. Shane is still doing it at a near-peak level at 35 years old. That's gotta count for something. Oh, and with 37 KO's out of 147, I think he's doing a little more than slapping.


In terms of record, they are pretty similar. You can argue that Shane's record isn't better, but I think it's impossible to argue that it's worse. The thing that puts Shane ahead is his success in so many different weight classes. I agree, Shane wasn't dominant at weights other than 135, but he was damn good and near the top. At 135, he was at least as dominant (if not more so) than Tito was at 147, and on top of that, he beat very good fighters all the way up to 154. The only guy Tito beat at 154 was Vargas and he didn't beat anybody that mattered at 160.

Top 20 all-time P4P? Not sure about that, I'll give him top 50, but he's higher on my list than Tito, and for that matter, Lopez.
Most of your points are weak.. Beating an old Pernell is easier said than done,ask Oscar And Trinidad dominated his division(147) against better fighters than Shane at 135.

Your argument is flawed as soon as you bring up Shane beating Vargas. Tito ruined a prime(or as close as he got to it) Vargas. He destroyed Mayorga. He annihilated and at times ended the career of good fighters like David Reid,Hugo Pineda,William Joppy,Oba Carr,was the first to beat the at the time feared Yory Boy Campas,beat the well rated Blocker and beat Pernell which was hard for anyone whether he was old or not and Camacho.Oh and lost to 2 All time Greats in B Hop and Winky.

And your point about his KO'S is also poor. Like I said,he was a monstor at lightweight but at the higher weights,he does not have the same power,slapping at times(NOT all the time). He has 2 kos in 5,6 years and they were against a shot,shot Vargas.

Oh and finally,you say lets not take anything away from Forrest but Forrest is not as good as Winky or B Hop? And Forrest is a good fighter but for one reason or another,has not lived up to his potential(most likely injuries). His only real big wins have been over Shane twice.

And again,Tito's win over Mayorga,nay his destruction....on a guy that beat Vernon twice.....so I think it mattered. Case closed.